Outline the factors that lead to different environmental value systems in contrasting cultures.

Explain why the harvesting of a named aquatic species may be controversial.

Discuss strategies that can be used to improve the sustainability of food production systems.

Factors may include:

cultural ie some cultures place a high value on nature and thus have a more ecocentric EVS;
religious ie some religions deify certain organisms/landscapes and thus have a more ecocentric EVS;
economic ie some would argue that more economically wealthy societies tend towards a more technocentric/anthropocentric EVS;
socio-political ie some would argue that a society with a strong social political movement would tend towards a more anthropocentric EVS;
experience/history ie societies that have experienced anthropogenic disasters may become more prone to adopt ecocentric value systems.

Award [3 max] if only one category of EVS is addressed (question asks for “contrasting cultures”).

Note: Full credit can be given where candidate gives a specific example to outline link between factor and EVS. However, if factors are simply named/listed without any explanatory outline broadly linking them to EVS, then award just 1 mark for every TWO valid factors identified up to 2 max.

Arguments against may include:
ethical issues arise over biorights of the aquatic species;
harvesting may contravene international conservation agreements;
species may be endangered/threatened with extinction;
some may consider the harvesting method as cruel/unethical;
if unsustainable, whole regions of the ocean may deplete of fish;
ecocentrics may promote veganism and oppose harvest of animal species;
ecocentrics would oppose any large scale harvesting/food production systems.

Arguments in favour may include:
harvesting necessary for some societies for subsistence/survival;
whole economies may be based on harvesting aquatic species;
fishing as a recreation/hobby brings people closer to nature;
aquaculture may allow harvesting without endangering the species;
if harvesting is within sustainable limits it poses no threat to others;
anthropocentrics would support sustainable harvesting;
technocentrics would support achieving maximum yield/greatest economic return;
and whatever technology/harvesting method will be most efficient in achieving this.

eg whales
hunting methods are cruel;
unethical to kill animals;
modern technologies are very efficient allowing no chance to the whale to escape (so it's "unfair");
populations are declining / many whale species are now endangered;
conflicts arise over territorial rights among fleet of different nations;
other species (eg dolphins) may be killed in the process / by-catch kill;
large parts are thrown back to sea (so wasting the kill);
increase in illegal whale hunting of endangered species (along with hunting of non-endangered species);
usually harvesting is not sustainable (as it is economic profit that counts);
in most countries (Norway, Japan, Iceland) whaling is not necessary for their subsistence nowadays;
conflicts arise with ecocentric NGOs opposing whaling (eg Greenpeace).

Award [6 max] if no named aquatic species.
Award [4 max] if response only addresses “arguments in favour” (“controversial” strongly implies arguments against).
If more than one species is addressed, credit only the highest scoring example.

Answers may demonstrate:

• understanding concepts & terminology of terrestrial and aquatic food production systems; sustainability; MSY; ecological footprint; natural income & capital; quotas; harvesting methods; organic farming; pest management; integrated aquaculture; monoculture v polyculture; food choice; social equality; soil degradation; water pollution; soil conservation strategies;
• breadth in addressing and linking technological and management strategies of terrestrial and aquatic food production systems with aspects of sustainability in terms of yield, environmental impacts, conservation, climate change, economics, food choices and social development and in the context of a range of geographical locations, social settings and EVSs.
• examples of named food production systems and strategies;
• balanced analysis evaluating a range of strategies in a range of food production systems (and social contexts) and how effective they each may be in improving sustainability along with their limitations and counterarguments;
• a conclusion that is consistent with, and supported by analysis and examples given eg the strategies which can be employed to improve the sustainability of a food production system may be viewed differently by various EVSs and it may take a more anthropocentric approach to balance the success of ecocentric strategies such as diet change and education about this, with the careful, monitored implementation of technological strategies such as the use of genetically modified organisms.

Refer to paper 2 markbands, available under the "your tests" tab > supplemental materials.

Most candidates could list some valid factors that may influence value systems but were often not able to outline link to particular viewpoints.

Majority of candidates could identify some controversial aspects of aquatic harvesting but would often make insufficient points to achieve all the marks available.

Most candidates were able to identify and describe effective strategies for sustainable food production but often lacked any element of counterargument or evaluation necessary for a ‘discuss’ question.